MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.- This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeks a direction to the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore through its Chairman to constitute a Committee or sub-committee for the purpose of re-marking the answer books of the petitioner.
The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition, are, that the petitioner appeared in the higher secondary examination of respondent No.2 held in 1990. According to the result declared by the respondents, the petitioner secured 786 marks. He applied to the respondents for re-checking of his answer books. This application was allowed to the extent that the petitioner was awarded 4 additional marks but his request as regards to the re-marking of physics paper-A question No.2-B and Urdu paper-B Part A, question No.4 was declined, though it was recommended by the Re- checking Committee constituted by the respondents themselves that certain portions of the papers of the petitioner required rechecking.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the strength of rule 5.11 of Calendar of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education has submitted that in law it was only the Chairman or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf who could dispose of the application for re-checking but no decision was taken by the Chairman or any other authorised person.
Mr. Ijaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that the matter was placed before the Chairman who approved the recommendation of the Controller of Examination for rejection of the application.
4. According to rule 11 of Chapter 5 of the Calendar of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education it is the Chairman or any other Officer authorised by him in this behalf, who is competent to take a decision on the application filed under this rule. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents that this power has not been delegated by the Chairman to any other Officer.
Consequently, it was the Chairman alone who could have taken the decision on the application filed by the petitioner. Unfortunately, when the matter was put up to the Chairman, the merely countersigned the recommendation of the Controller of Examinations. It is since long well settled that the authority which is competent in law to take a decision must do so after applying its own independent mind and the order passed by it must demonstrate and manifest the disposal of the cause by exercise of independent judgment and mere countersigning note is not a lawful disposal of the matter. (See Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din vs. Chief Settlement Commissioner (Pakistan) Lahore and others (PLD 1964 S.C 829).
In the present case, the grievance voiced by the petitioner in his application was to a great extent supported by the Committee constituted by the respondents for this purposes. In these circumstances, it was all the more necessary that the Chairman should have himself decided as to which of two recommendations, viz, of the Controller of Examinations or the Re-checking Committee, should be accepted. As already observed, there appears to be no independent decision on this aspect of the mailer by the Chairman. It is thus evident that the application filed by the petitioner has not been disposed of by the Chairman in accordance with law.
As a result of what has been stated above, this petition is accepted and the order dated 30.7.1990 rejecting the application of the petitioner is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect with the result that the application of the petitioner shall be deemed to be pending before the Chairman and shall be disposed of by him afresh in accordance with law. No order as to costs.